Hi,
On 16.04.21 11:49, Sascha Hauer wrote:
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6q-pfla02");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6dl-pfla02");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6s-pfla02");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6q-pcaaxl3");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6q-pcm058-nand");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6q-pcm058-emmc");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6dl-pcm058-nand");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6qp-pcm058-nand");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6dl-pcm058-emmc");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6ul-pcl063-nand");
> +BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE("phytec,imx6ul-pcl063-emmc");
How about changing BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE so BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE(physom_imx6_match);
works? Updated boards should be using board drivers anyway, so make it easier for them to
enable deep probe.
I'd go even further and require board drivers by having it take a driver_d * as argument
and introduce deep_probe_board_driver() that expands to postcore_platform_driver and
BAREBOX_DEEP_PROBE_ENABLE.
This would prevent having a board driver that's deep probe incompatible in the
first place, because it will likely not find the resources it requires that early
if it doesn't deep probe.
Cheers,
Ahmad
--
Pengutronix e.K. | |
Steuerwalder Str. 21 | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
31137 Hildesheim, Germany | Phone: +49-5121-206917-0 |
Amtsgericht Hildesheim, HRA 2686 | Fax: +49-5121-206917-5555 |
_______________________________________________
barebox mailing list
barebox@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox
